Client’s two-car attached garage caught fire, causing significant property damages in excess of $100,000.00. Fire department and insurance company launched investigations into the cause of the fire. ZLM successfully represented Client, who was ultimately not charged with arson. Further, insurance company ultimately paid the property damage claim.

1. Client charged with 2 counts of Felonious Assault with numerous firearm specifications, 2 counts of Improperly Handling Firearms in a Motor Vehicle, 1 Count of Discharge of Firearm on or Near Prohibited Premises, 1 Count of Having Weapons While Under Disability, 1 Count of Criminal Damaging, 1 Count of Drug Possession, and 1 Count of Possessing Criminal Tools found NOT GUILTY of all counts following trial, with the exception of Drug Possession and Possessing Criminal Tools. ZLM attorneys successfully appealed the convictions on these two counts, resulting in the Court of Appeals VACATING these convictions. ZLM also obtained a court order requiring the police to return the $7,000.00 in cash that had been seized from Client’s home.
2. Client charged with Assault on a Peace Officer, felony drug possession, and OVI. Client found NOT GUILTY of Assault on a Peace Officer following jury trial. Related charges of Drug Possession were subsequently DISMISSED by prosecution. The OVI charge was later amended and reduced to Reckless Operation.
3. ZLM Client charged with Assault, found NOT GUILTY following trial.
4. ZLM Client charged with Felonious Assault, Felony Domestic Violence, and Felony Endangering Children found NOT GUILTY of all counts following jury trial.
5. ZLM Client, a high-ranking law enforcement officer, was under investigation for RAPE, after being accused by woman of choking her during sexual activity. ZLM found and provided to detective exculpatory evidence, including text messages, and convinced prosecuting attorney to NOT PURSUE CHARGES against Client.
6. ZLM Client was charged with Felonious Assault of a Police Officer (F-1) when officer claimed that Client raised his arms with weapon as if to strike officer. After Jury Trial, where ZLM established that the officer did not properly identify himself and that Client was justified in engaging in self-defense, jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY.
7. ZLM Client was charged with Felonious Assault and weapons offenses she was defending herself against a family member who assaulted her with a box-cutter. After a Jury Trial, client was found NOT GUILTY.

1. ZLM Client, 18 years of age, faced the possibility of decades in prison for possession of child Pornography, however, ZLM convinced prosecuting attorney to charge Client as a juvenile, thus avoiding a possible prison sentence. In Juvenile Court, ZLM attorneys identified numerous problems within Affidavit for Search Warrant and filed a Motion to Suppress. As a result of ZLM’s representation, ZLM successfully negotiated plea agreement whereby Client entered an admission to two (2) counts of possessing criminal tools and remaining charges were dismissed. As a result, Client served no time in jail or juvenile detention, was not classified as a sex offender, and was sentenced to a short term of probation. Within one year of the plea, ZLM successfully petitioned the Court to seal Client’s juvenile adjudication, and the case was deemed not to have occurred.
2. ZLM Client charged with Attempted Unlawful Sexual Conduct with a Minor, Importuning, and Possessing Criminal Tools, all felony offenses. ZLM aggressively attacked the credibility and qualifications of lead enforcement officer, discovered that certain evidence had been lost or destroyed by law enforcement, and ultimately negotiated plea agreement involving no felony conviction and no sexually oriented offense conviction. Pursuant to plea agreement, Client entered plea of guilty to only misdemeanor charge of Possession of Criminal Tools. Court imposed a small fine and no jail time or probation. 

1. ZLM aggressive defense of Client charged with felony drug trafficking and drug related offenses resulted in charges being dismissed against Client. Client’s residence was allegedly being used for drug activity and when a violent crime occurred there, law enforcement threatened to (and did) charge Client with drug trafficking unless she provided information about the violent crime. ZLM filed a Motion to Disclose Grand Jury Transcripts based on absence of evidence to support the charges against Client and law enforcement officer’s threat against Client. Thereafter, the State of Ohio dismissed all charges against Client.
2. Judge granted ZLM’s motion to suppress evidence and dismissed indictment that charged Client with felony drug possession and possession of criminal tools.  ZLM’s motion to suppress challenged the police officers’ stop and search of the Client after the officer observed the Client leave a house where individuals were suspected to have been engaged in drug activity.  Judge also ordered the police to return all of the money and other property that was seized from the Client.
3. ZLM convinced prosecutor to amend Client’s felony drug possession charge to a misdemeanor offense based on issues raised in a Motion to Suppress evidence that challenged whether the officer had reasonable suspicion to justify the prolonged detention of the client during the traffic stop.
4. ZLM convinced prosecutor to amend Client’s felony drug possession offense to a misdemeanor offense based on issues raised by ZLM in a Motion to Suppress that challenged whether the officer had reasonable suspicion to initiate a traffic stop of the vehicle the client was traveling in as a passenger and the officer’s prolonged detention of the Client during the traffic stop without reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was afoot.
5. Client, with a prior felony conviction, charged with felony drug possession, retained ZLM in an effort to obtain Intervention in Lieu of Conviction. Client had been represented by other counsel and was unsuccessful in convincing prosecutor to consent to Intervention in Lieu of Conviction. ZLM filed a Motion to Suppress, asserting, among other things, that the traffic stop of Client was not supported by probable cause and that Client was unconstitutionally detained following the stop. During suppression hearing ZLM effectively cross-examined the arresting officer and, following the hearing, Client obtained Intervention in Lieu of Conviction after prosecuting attorney agreed to not object. Client was able to continue in her rehabilitation efforts and avoid a felony conviction.
6. ZLM Client charged with felony drug possession following a traffic stop at a gas station. The Indictment included a forfeiture specification for several thousand dollars that was found by officers during the search of Client’s pockets. ZLM filed a Motion to Suppress on the grounds that officers did not have reasonable suspicion to believe that Client was engaged in criminal activity. On the day of the suppression hearing, prosecutors agreed that the traffic stop was illegal and all charges were dismissed. ZLM also successfully argued for the return of all of Client’s money that had been seized by police.
7. ZLM’s Client charged with several counts of felony drug possession and drug trafficking, facing over a decade in potential prison time, following a traffic stop of a vehicle in which she was the passenger. After a search of the vehicle, officers discovered over sixty (60) pounds of marijuana. After reviewing the dash camera video from the officers’ cruisers, ZLM filed a Motion to Suppress on the grounds that the traffic stop was illegal. Prior to the Motion to Suppress hearing, the prosecutor acknowledged that the traffic stop of ZLM’s client by officers was questionable in nature, and may have been illegal. Thereafter, ZLM successfully negotiated a plea bargain resulting in ZLM Client avoiding prison by entering a plea to a reduced drug possession charge and being sentenced to probation only.

During trial, ZLM successfully obtained DISMISSAL OF ALL COUNTS for Client charged with two counts of Rape, two counts of Gross Sexual Imposition, two counts of kidnapping, and two counts of sexual battery, following Motion to Dismiss based on destruction of evidence by State of Ohio. The State of Ohio appealed the trial court’s DISMISSAL of the case and ZLM successfully won the appeal, with the appellate court affirming the DISMISSAL of all charges as ordered by the trial court. The State of Ohio sought leave to appeal from the Ohio Supreme Court. Again, ZLM attorneys prevailed again, and the Supreme Court of Ohio declined to review the case. Thereafter, ZLM successfully filed a lawsuit against the detective and complaining witness, amongst others, and successfully negotiated a six-figure financial settlement in Client’s favor.

ZLM successfully defended Client, Captain of a Police Department, who was charged with raping his infant daughter after he caught his wife cheating on him. The wife instituted divorce proceedings and fabricated the charges against Client. The grand jury returned an indictment, charging the Client with rape – which carried with it a life sentence if Client was convicted. The State of Ohio’s expert witness opined that the rape charge was supported by physical evidence – an alleged injury to the infant daughter’s hymen. ZLM obtained independent expert witness who opined that the alleged hymen injury was nothing more than a naturally occurring cleft. ZLM was able to establish that the false testimony of the State of Ohio expert witness, presented to the grand jury, constituted prosecutorial misconduct, which led to DISMISSAL of all charges.

ZLM obtained DISMISSAL of Client’s attempted rape and abduction charges, after ZLM uncovered and established that Client had been set up by complaining witness and her husband in a scheme to have the Client arrested and charged with crimes. The scheme included luring Client to residence on false pretenses, then having complaining witness’ husband “defend” his wife by attacking Client and chasing him from home. ZLM not only convinced prosecuting attorney to DISMISS all charges against Client, prosecuting attorney indicted complaining witness and husband. ZLM also sued and obtained judgment against complaining witness and husband in an amount in excess of 1.5 million dollars.

Law enforcement officers, using the “Grindr” app, engaged in a text conversation with Client, during which law enforcement officer posed as an underage person. When Client responded to the “residence” of the undercover officer, Client was arrested and subsequently charged with Attempted Unlawful Sexual Conduct With a Minor, Importuning, and Possessing Criminal Tools, all felony offenses. ZLM aggressively attacked the credibility of the undercover officer by obtaining his personnel file and discovering disciplinary actions had been taken against the officer. ZLM further discovered that certain evidence had been lost or destroyed by law enforcement, including the fake “Grindr” profile page. As a result of ZLM’s representation, ZLM successfully negotiated a plea agreement involving no felony conviction and no sexually oriented offense conviction – Client entered a plea of guilty to a misdemeanor charge of Possession of Criminal Tools, and the sexually oriented charges were dismissed. As a result, the Court imposed a small fine, and no jail or probation was ordered.

ZLM successfully defended father falsely accused of raping his minor child. Father and mother engaged in a contentious divorce, during which mother falsely accused father of raping their minor child. Through fast investigation, Client passing a private polygraph examination and use of medical and psychological records, ZLM convinced the prosecutor to not charge Client with a rape charge that would have resulted in a life sentence, if convicted. Several years later, mother again falsely reported rape charges against father during a custody battle. Again, ZLM convinced the prosecutor to not proceed with criminal prosecution of Client based upon mother’s manipulations of the legal system.

ZLM Client charged with Sexual Imposition and facing deportation if convicted. ZLM successfully defended Client at trial by attacking credibility of complaining witness and    establishing possibility of complaining witness’s financial motivation to fabricate         allegations. Client found NOT GUILTY of all charges following jury trial.

ZLM client charged in two separate Indictments with multiple counts of Rape, Kidnapping, Felonious Assault, Robbery, Felony Domestic Violence and Endangering Children. Each Indictment also included Notices of Prior Convictions and Repeat Violent Offender Specifications, which increased the potential prison time upon conviction by twenty years. From the onset, ZLM took the position that the charges were the product of false allegations being made against the client by his jealous, vindictive ex-girlfriend. ZLM mounted an aggressive defense to the charges which included interviews of multiple witnesses, issuance of dozens of  subpoenas for evidence, including 911 calls, police reports, text messages, photographs and other records, as well as the submission of public record requests. Ultimately, ZLM discovered that the complaining witness had lied to the authorities several times in the past and made multiple, previous false allegations of assault against Client. Through pre-trial disclosures and filings, ZLM provided all of the information uncovered through its investigation to the Prosecutor’s office. Ultimately, due to ZLM’s aggressive defense, on the day of trial, ZLM secured a dismissal of all charges against the Client.

ZLM Client charged with Gross Sexual Imposition and Kidnapping with Sexual Motivation Specification found NOT GUILTY of all charges following jury trial.

ZLM successfully defended Client charged with Rape by finding and obtaining police incident reports establishing that complaining witness had a documented history of mental health issues and had previously made unsubstantiated claims to law enforcement. Using said records to cross-examine complaining witness, ZLM further established mental health treatment history. Client found NOT GUILTY following jury trial.

ZLM obtained DISMISSAL of Client’s felony kidnapping and gross-sexual imposition charges that were based on false allegations made by Client’s ex-wife and adopted teenage daughter. Through extensive investigation, ZLM was able to establish that wife and adopted daughter fabricated allegations against Client. After proving that Client’s daughter and ex-wife lied about the allegations, ZLM obtained a DISMISSAL of all charges. Thereafter, ZLM sued ex-wife, adopted teenage daughter, and others and negotiated a $100,000.00 civil settlement.

ZLM Client was facing the possibility of decades in prison, having been charged with 1 count of Sexual Imposition, 24 counts of Unlawful Sexual Conduct With a Minor, and 1 count of Disseminating Matter Harmful to a Juvenile. Through cross-examination, ZLM         established significant flaws in investigation and further attacked credibility of complaining witness. Following jury trial, 13 counts of Unlawful Sexual Conduct With a Minor were DISMISSED by the Court, the jury ACQUITED Client of 4 other counts of Unlawful Sexual Conduct With a Minor, and the jury hung on remaining counts. Subsequently, pursuant to plea agreement, Client plead to a misdemeanor offense and all remaining counts were dismissed. Client served no time in jail, receiving sentence of only six months of probation.

ZML Client charged with Rape and Kidnapping, among other charges. ZLM attorneys used cell phone text message history and expert witness reports to establish likelihood that sexual conduct was consensual. ZLM attorneys successfully negotiated a resolution involving a plea to non-sexual misdemeanor offenses, avoiding mandatory imprisonment and Client being classified as a sex offender. Thereafter, ZLM successfully petitioned Court to have case sealed.

ZLM Client, a former professional basketball player, was indicted for rape, kidnapping and gross sexual imposition. By establishing through the testimony of other individuals, including a friend of the complaining witness, that the complaining witness engaged in     consensual sexual activity with ZLM’s Client, all charges were dismissed by the prosecutor prior to trial.

ZLM attorneys were referred Client under investigation for felony unlawful sexual conduct with a minor. ZLM attorneys immediately contacted prosecuting attorney and learned that case was scheduled to be presented to the county grand jury the next day. ZLM convinced the prosecuting attorney to postpone the grand jury presentment. ZLM attorneys immediately investigated the case and prepared a mitigation package to present to the prosecuting attorney. Ultimately, ZLM attorneys were able to convince the prosecuting attorney to not seek a felony indictment and instead, a non-sexual offense misdemeanor plea agreement was negotiated. The non-sexual misdemeanor conviction was subsequently sealed.

ZLM convinced prosecutor to amend client’s misdemeanor voyeurism offense to a disorderly conduct offense based on issues raised in motion to suppress evidence that challenged the police officers’ warrantless search and seizure of the client’s cell phone.       Client had been accused by a mall patron of positioning his cellphone as he rode up an escalator to record and/or photograph underneath the skirt of a woman that was riding in    front of him.  Due to the amendment of the client’s voyeurism offense, the Client avoided        the possibility of being classified as a sex offender.

ZLM Client charged with felony tampering with evidence and voyeurism. ZLM filed Motions to Suppress, asserting that statements were unconstitutionally obtained from Client by law enforcement and asserting that a search warrant to search the contents of Client’s cell phone violated the particularity clause of the Fourth Amendment. As a result of ZLM’s efforts, as well as mitigating evidence obtained by ZLM and delivered to the prosecuting attorney, ZLM successfully persuaded the prosecution to dismiss the felony tampering with evidence charge and to amend the voyeurism charge to a non-sexual misdemeanor offense, thus avoiding the possibility of Client being classified as a sex offender. Client received a sentence of probation.

ZLM convinced prosecutor to dismiss multiple charges of voyeurism and a charge of illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material and to permit the client to plead to a non-sexual, attempted tampering with evidence offense based on issues raised in a Motion to Suppress filed by ZLM that challenged the validity of a search warrant that law   enforcement officers obtained to search the client’s cellphone.  Client had been accused by a security officer of taking “up-skirt” photographs of an unsuspecting juvenile female.  Due to the dismissal of the above charges, the Client avoided the possibility of being classified as a sex offender.

ZLM Client, 18 years of age, faced the possibility of decades in prison for possession of child Pornography, however, ZLM convinced prosecuting attorney to charge Client as a juvenile, thus avoiding a possible prison sentence. In Juvenile Court, ZLM attorneys identified numerous problems within Affidavit for Search Warrant and filed a Motion to Suppress. As a result of ZLM’s representation, ZLM successfully negotiated plea agreement whereby Client entered an admission to two (2) counts of possessing criminal tools and remaining charges were dismissed. As a result, Client served no time in jail or juvenile detention, was not classified as a sex offender, and was sentenced to a short term of probation. Within one year of the plea, ZLM successfully petitioned the Court to seal Client’s juvenile adjudication, and the case was deemed not to have occurred.

1. ZLM Client, a licensed nurse, was charged with felony charge of Improperly Handling a Firearm in a Motor Vehicle and OVI. ZLM won a suppression hearing conducted in the municipal court relative to the OVI charge, resulting in a dismissal of the felony firearm charge. ZLM also convinced municipal prosecutor to dismiss the OVI charge that served as the basis for his felony offense.
2. ZLM Client charged with Carrying Concealed Weapons (loaded firearm), a felony offense. ZLM successfully asserted an affirmative defense at trial, establishing that Client   carried the weapon in relation to Client’s lawful business or occupation. Client was            found NOT GUILTY following jury trial.
3. ZLM convinced prosecutor to amend client’s second degree felony charge of Improperly Discharging a Firearm at or Into a Habitation to a misdemeanor firearm offense and to dismiss client’s felony disrupting public services offense.  Client was accused of firing a      gun inside his home after his frustration from another loss by the Cleveland Browns and   an argument he had with his wife.
4. ZLM convinced prosecutor to amend client’s felony charge of Improperly Handling a Firearm in a Motor Vehicle to a fourth-degree misdemeanor disorderly conduct offense, based on issues raised in Motion to Suppress evidence that challenged whether arresting officer had reasonable suspicion to initiate a traffic stop of the Client’s vehicle.  A police officer decided to initiate a traffic stop on the Client’s motor vehicle for an alleged welfare check after observing the Client sitting in the driver seat of a motor vehicle that was parked in a closed gas station at 1:00 a.m. with its engine running.  The officer pulled Client’s vehicle over as he began driving away from the gas station.  Despite the Client allegedly failing all of the field sobriety tests that were administered to him and producing a breath test result of .141, ZLM was able to obtain the above reduction to a misdemeanor disorderly conduct offense.
5. ZLM convinced prosecutor to dismiss client’s third degree felony charge of having a weapon under disability and to amend client’s fourth degree felony charge of improperly handling a firearm in a motor vehicle to a misdemeanor carrying concealed weapon offense due to issues raised in a motion to suppress evidence that challenged the constitutionality of the traffic stop, seizure of the client while the officer waited for a drug detection canine to be transported to the scene from another county, and subsequent search of the client’s motor vehicle. Officers had pulled the client’s vehicle over after receiving information that the client had just pulled out of the driveway of a nearby residence after completing a suspected drug transaction and after allegedly observing the client drive over the marked lanes of the roadway. Upon reviewing the dash camera video from the arresting officer’s police cruiser, ZLM did not observe the Client commit a traffic violation and overheard one of the officers disclose to another officer that he was banking on the fact that the Client had a warrant out for his arrest in hopes of having a lawful basis to search the Client’s vehicle.  As part of the plea agreement, the prosecutor also agreed to return over $3,000.00 in cash that the police officer seized from the client’s vehicle during the traffic stop.
6. ZLM convinced prosecutor to amend client’s charge of discharging a firearm within the City limits to a minor misdemeanor disorderly conduct offense based on a number of issues raised by ZLM in a Motion to Dismiss filed by ZLM, including issues that challenged the constitutionality of the ordinance that the client was charged with violating. Client, a business owner, chased after a thief who had stolen merchandise from his store. Upon observing the thief reach near his waistband as he ran towards a getaway car, the Client fired his gun into the air.
7. ZLM convinced prosecutor to dismiss client’s charges of felonious assault and to permit client to plea to misdemeanor charges of aggravated menacing. Client was accused of pointing a firearm at his college roommates and threatening to shoot them while he was highly intoxicated in his dorm room.
8. ZLM convinced prosecutor to dismiss client’s charges of having weapons under disability, improperly handling a firearm in a motor vehicle, and possessing a defaced firearm, and to agree to amend client’s felony charge of carrying a concealed weapon to a misdemeanor offense and to amend client’s charge of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of cocaine and marijuana to a zero point, non-moving traffic violation of being in physical control of a motor vehicle while under the influence of drugs.
9. ZLM Client, a doctor, was charged with a felony offense of improperly handling a firearm in a motor vehicle; Operating a Vehicle Under the Influence of Alcohol, and Driving on Sidewalk. ZLM successfully negotiated a plea agreement whereby the felony firearm offense was dismissed, the OVI charge was amended to Reckless Operation, a Misdemeanor of the 4^th Degree. Client entered pleas to a fourth-degree misdemeanor Reckless Operation offense and a minor misdemeanor offense of Driving on Sidewalk.
10. ZLM convinced prosecutor to dismiss Client’s felony charge of improperly handling a firearm in a motor vehicle.

1. ZLM Client charged with 2 counts of Felonious Assault that each contained one-year, three-year, and five-year firearm specifications, 2 counts of Improperly Handling Firearms in a Motor Vehicle, 1 Count of Discharge of Firearm on or Near Prohibited Premises, 1 Count of Having Weapons While Under Disability, 1 Count of Criminal Damaging, 1 Count of Drug Possession, and 1 Count of Possessing Criminal Tools.  Following a jury trial, Client found NOT GUILTY of all counts, with the exception of Drug Possession and Possessing Criminal Tools. ZLM attorneys successfully appealed the convictions on these two counts, resulting in the Court of Appeals VACATING these convictions. In addition to obtaining an acquittal of the above charges and a reversal of the defendant’s convictions on the remaining charges, ZLM also obtained a court order requiring the police to return the $7,000.00 in cash that the seized during their search the Client’s home.
2. ZLM represented a Court of Common Pleas judge for purposes of opposing a writ of prohibition filed against the judge in a case involving the judge’s jurisdiction to conduct a contempt hearing against a witness after the case had already been settled and dismissed. When the Court of Appeals granted the writ of prohibition, ZLM appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court. ZLM won in the Ohio Supreme Court, which reversed the appellate court’s granting of the writ of prohibition, thus preserving ZLM’s Client’s judicial powers and jurisdiction.
3. ZLM assigned to handle appeal for a man convicted of, among other charges, trafficking in marijuana (eight pounds) with a schoolyard specification, for which the trial court imposed a seven-year term of imprisonment. ZLM WON the appeal, the judgment of conviction was REVERSED, and the case was remanded back to the trial court for a new trial. ZLM attorneys assigned to represent the man for purposes of the new trial and negotiated a plea agreement whereby the Client entered a plea to a possession count, remaining counts were dismissed, and Client sentenced to time served.
4. Client/Attorney retained ZLM after being found in contempt of court and sentenced to jail.  ZLM immediately obtained an order from the appellate court staying the imposition of the jail sentence, then successfully appealed the trial court’s finding of contempt.  ZLM WON the appeal, obtaining a reversal of the contempt finding from the Court of Appeals, resulting in Client avoiding a jail sentence and clearing the contempt finding from the Client’s record.
5. When trial court denied Client’s application to seal his records of felony conviction, ZLM appealed. The Court of appeals reversed the trial court’s denial and remanded the case back to the trial court for further proceedings. The trial court again denied Client’s application to seal, finding that Client did not qualify as a “first offender”. ZLM again appealed and again won on appeal, with the court of appeals reversing the trial court’s order, specifically finding that Client was a “first offender”, and remanding the case back to the trial court. Subsequently, Client’s records were sealed.
6. After ZLM Client stopped at OVI check-point, officer alleged that he detected an odor of alcohol from vehicle and observed empty beer bottles in vehicle. Client ordered to exit his vehicle, and requested to perform Standardized Field Sobriety Tests. Thereafter, Client was arrested and charged with an OVI offense. ZLM filed a Motion to Suppress, challenging, among other things, the constitutionality of the check-point and probable cause to arrest Client for OVI. During suppression hearing, dash-cam video and cross-examination of arresting officer established that officer failed to substantially comply with National Highway Traffic Safety Administration guidelines. Trial court agreed with ZLM that officer did establish probable cause to arrest Client and granted ZLM’s motion. The prosecuting attorney appealed the trial court’s decision to the Eighth District Court of Appeals. ZLM prevailed again on appeal, with the appellate court stating, in relevant part, “we cannot be compliant in the faulty prosecution of a case that results from improper, prejudicial gathering of evidence”. The OVI charge was subsequently DISMISSED.

1. ZLM attorneys convinced prosecutor to not present case to grand jury for possible felony indictment.  Client, a high-ranking law enforcement officer, was accused by a woman he met several months earlier on a dating website of choking her during what began as consensual sexual activity.  ZLM provided the lead detective with exculpatory information, including text messages that the woman sent to ZLM’s Client prior to and after the woman claimed he assaulted her.  Based on the evidence provided by ZLM to the detective, the prosecuting attorney chose to cancel the grand jury proceedings and not pursue any criminal charges against ZLM’s client.
2. ZLM obtained DISMISSAL of Client’s attempted rape and abduction charges, after ZLM uncovered and established that Client had been set up by complaining witness and her husband in a scheme to have the Client arrested and charged with crimes. The scheme included luring Client to residence on false pretenses, then having complaining witness’ husband “defend” his wife by attacking Client and chasing him from home. ZLM not only convinced prosecuting attorney to DISMISS all charges against Client, prosecuting attorney indicted complaining witness and husband. ZLM also sued and obtained judgment against complaining witness and husband in an amount in excess of 1.5 million dollars.
3. ZLM obtained DISMISSAL of Client’s felony kidnapping and gross-sexual imposition charges that were based on false allegations made by Client’s ex-wife and adopted teenage daughter. Through extensive investigation, ZLM was able to establish that wife and adopted daughter fabricated allegations against Client. After proving that Client’s daughter and ex-wife lied about the allegations, ZLM obtained a DISMISSAL of all charges. Thereafter, ZLM sued ex-wife, adopted teenage daughter, and others and negotiated a $100,000.00 civil settlement.
4. ZLM Client charged with 2 counts of Felonious Assault that each contained one-year, three-year, and five-year firearm specifications, 2 counts of Improperly Handling Firearms in a Motor Vehicle, 1 Count of Discharge of Firearm on or Near Prohibited Premises, 1 Count of Having Weapons While Under Disability, 1 Count of Criminal Damaging, 1 Count of Drug Possession, and 1 Count of Possessing Criminal Tools.  Following a jury trial, Client found NOT GUILTY of all counts, with the exception of Drug Possession and Possessing Criminal Tools. ZLM attorneys successfully appealed the convictions on these two counts, resulting in the Court of Appeals VACATING these convictions. In addition to obtaining an acquittal of the above charges and a reversal of the defendant’s convictions on the remaining charges, ZLM also obtained a court order requiring the police to return the $7,000.00 in cash that the seized during their search the Client’s home.
5. ZLM Client charged with Assault on a Peace Officer, felony drug possession, and OVI. Client found NOT GUILTY of Assault on a Peace Officer following jury trial. Related charges of Drug Possession were subsequently DISMISSED by prosecution. The OVI charge was later amended and reduced to Reckless Operation.
6. ZLM Client charged with Assault, found NOT GUILTY following trial.
7. ZLM Client charged with Felonious Assault, Felony Domestic Violence, and Felony Endangering Children out of an incident where Client threw a glass plate at his teenage son that broke and caused a large cut on the son’s arm that required medical attention. After a multi-day jury trial, the jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY on all counts.
8. ZLM Client charged with Felonious Assault of a Police Officer (F-1) when officer claimed that Client raised his arms with weapon as if to strike officer. After Jury Trial, where ZLM proved that the officer did not properly identify himself and that Client was justified in engaging in self-defense, the Jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY.
9. ZLM Client charged with Felonious Assault and weapons offenses when she was defending herself against a family member who assaulted her with a box-cutter. After a Jury Trial, client was found NOT GUILTY.
10. ZLM successfully defends Client charged with Ethnic Intimidation and Menacing as Client found NOT GUILTY of both charges following jury trial.
11. ZLM successfully defends Client charged with Domestic Violence by attacking credibility of complaining witness at trial. Client found NOT GUILTY following jury trial.
12. ZLM Client charged with Domestic Violence, in violation of R.C. 2919.25(A) and Disorderly Conduct, in violation of R.C. 2917.11(A)(1). ZLM successfully convinced prosecuting attorney to DISMISS both charges.
13. ZLM Client charged with Domestic Violence of sister-in-law. ZLM convinced prosecutor to DISMISS charge.
14. ZLM Client’s wife (from an arranged marriage), accused Client of tying her to a chair, taping her mouth shut, and being verbally and physically abusive to her. Client was charged with felony kidnapping and abduction. ZLM persuasively convinced prosecuting attorney to dismiss charges. Client was not a United States citizen and would have been subject to removal from the United States if he was convicted of any of the charges that he was indicted for.
15. ZLM Client charged with Domestic Violence for allegedly assaulting his daughter. ZLM Client found NOT GUILTY following a Bench Trial.
16. ZLM Client charged with Domestic Violence for allegedly assaulting and threatening his wife with whom Client was going through a divorce. ZLM Client found NOT GUILTY following a Bench Trial.
17. ZLM Client charged with Felonious Assault, Felony Domestic Violence, and Felony Endangering Children out of an incident where Client threw a glass plate at his teenage son that broke and caused a large cut on the son’s arm that required medical attention. After a multi-day jury trial, the jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY on all counts.
18. During trial, ZLM successfully obtained DISMISSAL OF ALL COUNTS for Client charged with two counts of Rape, two counts of Gross Sexual Imposition, two counts of kidnapping, and two counts of sexual battery, following Motion to Dismiss based on destruction of evidence by State of Ohio. The State of Ohio appealed the trial court’s DISMISSAL of the case and ZLM successfully won the appeal, with the appellate court affirming the DISMISSAL of all charges as ordered by the trial court. The State of Ohio sought leave to appeal from the Ohio Supreme Court. Again, ZLM attorneys prevailed again, and the Supreme Court of Ohio declined to review the case. Thereafter, ZLM successfully filed a lawsuit against the detective and complaining witness, amongst others, and successfully negotiated a six-figure financial settlement in Client’s favor.
19. ZLM Client charged with Sexual Imposition and facing deportation if convicted. ZLM successfully defends Client at trial by attacking credibility of complaining witness and establishing possibility of complaining witness’s financial motivation to fabricate allegations. Client found NOT GUILTY of all charges following jury trial.
20. ZLM Client charged with Gross Sexual Imposition and Kidnapping with Sexual Motivation Specification found NOT GUILTY of all charges following jury trial.
21. ZLM successfully defended Client charged with Rape by finding and obtaining police incident reports through public records requests establishing that complaining witness had a documented history of mental health issues and had previously made unsubstantiated claims to law enforcement. Using said records to cross-examine complaining witness, ZLM further established mental health treatment history. Client found NOT GUILTY following jury trial.
22. ZLM Client was facing the possibility of decades in prison, having been charged with 1 count of Sexual Imposition, 24 counts of Unlawful Sexual Conduct With a Minor, and 1 count of Disseminating Matter Harmful to a Juvenile. Through cross-examination, ZLM established significant flaws in investigation and further attacked credibility of complaining witness. Following jury trial, 13 counts of Unlawful Sexual Conduct With a Minor were DISMISSED by the Court, the jury ACQUITED Client of 4 other counts of Unlawful Sexual Conduct With a Minor, and the jury hung on remaining counts. Subsequently, pursuant to plea agreement, Client plead to a misdemeanor offense and all remaining counts were dismissed. Client served no time in jail, receiving sentence of only six months of probation.
23. ZML Client charged with Rape and Kidnapping, among other charges. ZLM attorneys used cell phone text message history and expert witness reports to establish likelihood that sexual conduct was consensual. ZLM attorneys successfully negotiated a resolution involving a plea to non-sexual misdemeanor offenses, avoiding mandatory imprisonment and Client being classified as a sex offender. Thereafter, ZLM successfully petitioned Court to have case sealed.
24. ZLM Client, a former professional basketball player, was indicted for rape, kidnapping and gross sexual imposition. By establishing through the testimony of other individuals, including a friend of the complaining witness, that the complaining witness engaged in consensual sexual activity with ZLM’s Client, all charges were dismissed by the prosecutor prior to trial.

1. ZLM attorneys successfully negotiated a reduction from OVI charge to a lesser charge of Physical Control for Client with a Commercial Driver’s License (CDL), to avoid automatic 1-year CDL disqualification. ZLM attorneys further successfully obtained a Court Order vacating Administrative License Suspension, to avoid 1-year CDL disqualification. Client sentenced to 6 months non-reporting probation, no Driver’s License Suspension. Previously imposed CDL disqualification resulting from Administrative License Suspension removed and deleted from Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles system, allowing Client to continue her employment as a CDL driver.
2. ZLM Client with Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) charged with OVI offense and placed under Administrative License Suspension (ALS). ZLM attorneys convince Court and prosecutor to vacate the ALS, and, thereafter, convince prosecuting attorney to amend OVI charge to Physical Control violation, thus avoiding an automatic 1-year CDL disqualification for Client.

1. ZLM successfully represented Major League Baseball player charged with Operating a Vehicle Under the Influence of Alcohol, following a two-car collision. At trial, ZLM  offered testimony of paramedic that examined Client following accident and, during cross-examination of arresting officer, established that officer was studying his National Highway Traffic Safety Administration handbook to prepare his testimony in front of the jury during trial and prior to his testimony. Client found NOT GUILTY following jury trial.
2. ZLM client charged with Operating a Vehicle Under the Influence of Alcohol and Operating a Vehicle With a Prohibited Breath-Alcohol Content found NOT GUILTY of   both charges following jury trial.
3. ZLM Client charged with Operating a Vehicle Under the Influence of Alcohol, found NOT GUILTY following jury trial. During cross-examination of arresting officer, arresting officer refused to admit that blood-shot eyes can be caused by things other than alcohol consumption, including lack of sleep or cigarette smoke.
4. ZLM successfully persuaded a jury to find Client NOT GUILTY of an OVI offense and for failing to stop after an accident. Client was one of four individuals in a vehicle that became disabled after striking a tree. All of the occupants of the vehicle had been drinking and fled on foot from the scene of the crash before the police responded to the scene.  Three occupants of the vehicle who were close friends with each other advised the police that ZLM’s Client had been the individual operating the motor vehicle at the time of the crash.  Based solely on the allegations of the other individuals in the vehicle, the police located the Accused, arrested him, and charged with said offenses.
5. ZLM Client charged with Operating a Vehicle Under the Influence of Alcohol and Operating a Vehicle With a Prohibited Breath-Alcohol Concentration (over .17). During Administrative License Suspension appeal hearing, arresting officer admits Client passed the One Leg Stand and Walk and Turn field sobriety tests, and ZLM establishes that officer did not perform the Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus test properly, and that Client did not admit to consumption of alcohol until after Client was arrested and in the patrol car. During subsequent suppression hearing, officer changed his testimony by testifying that Client admitted to consumption of alcohol prior to his arrest. ZLM won suppression hearing, with Court finding no probable cause to arrest, resulting in prosecutor DISMISSING both OVI charges.
6. ZLM won a suppression hearing and obtained a dismissal of Client’s OVI charges. Client, a licensed pharmacist, was arrested for an OVI offense after leaving a concert.  The arresting officer alleged that the client failed field sobriety tests and produced a breath test result of .105. The Court agreed with ZLM that the officer did not administer the standardized field sobriety tests in substantial compliance with NHTSA standards and that law enforcement did not substantially comply with Ohio Department of Health instrument check procedures relative to the breath test machine.
7. ZLM won a suppression hearing and obtained a DISMISSAL of Client’s OVI charges. Client was charged with a third offense OVI charge and was facing the possibility of being sentenced between a mandatory minimum of sixty (60) consecutive days in jail and up to one (1) year in jail.  State Trooper alleged that he observed Client commit a speeding violation after observing Client pull out of a Taco Bell drive-through. State Trooper further alleged that he detected the odor of an alcoholic beverage coming from the Client’s person and that Client failed all of the field sobriety tests. Based on the testimony from the Trooper elicited by ZLM on cross-examination, the Court found that the Trooper did not administer the field sobriety tests in substantial compliance with NHTSA standards.
8. ZLM won suppression hearing and obtained an Order from the Court suppressing client’s field sobriety test results and high-tier breath test result (greater than .17). The Court agreed with ZLM that the officer did not administer the standardized field sobriety tests in substantial compliance with NHTSA standards and that the prosecutor failed to show that the police department maintained its breath test machine in compliance with the Ohio Department of Health and Ohio Administrative Code requirements.
9. Following a two-car collision in a parking lot, law enforcement officers request woman operator of other car and Client’s wife to come to police station to fill out accident report. While at police station, other operator of vehicle alleged that Client was operating the other car and believed that he was under the influence of alcohol. Client’s wife was instructed to have her husband come to the police station, where he was subsequently arrested for operating a vehicle under the influence of alcohol. ZLM filed a Motion to Suppress, asserting in part that law enforcement lacked probable cause to arrest Client. ZLM attorneys convinced prosecuting attorney to dismiss the charges against Client. When prosecutor subsequently charged Client with Hit-Skip violation based on same incident, ZLM filed a Motion to Dismiss based on speedy trial grounds. Court agreed, and granted ZLM’s Motion to Dismiss.
10. ZLM Client and Client’s wife were driving home from a night out, but, unfortunately, were stopped at a OVI check-point. While at the check-point, officer detected an odor of alcohol emanating from the vehicle, and asked Client to blow into a portable, non-evidential breath-testing device. Officer alleged that Client purposely attempted to avoid a positive reading by not properly blowing into the device, and diverted Client’s vehicle to a staging area for further investigation. At the staging area, Client ordered to exit his vehicle and requested to perform Standardized Field Sobriety Tests. After complying, Client arrested for OVI and asked to submit to breath-test, resulting in Client testing over the legal limit of .08. ZLM filed a Motion to Suppress, challenging, among other things, the constitutionality of the OVI check-point, as well as the detention and seizure of Client without reasonable suspicion. Following suppression hearing, Court agrees with ZLM that officer did not have reasonable suspicion to continue the detention of Client by diverting his vehicle to the staging area. As a result, Court granted Motion to Suppress, resulting in DISMISSAL of all charges.
11. After ZLM Client stopped at OVI check-point, officer alleged that he detected an odor of alcohol from vehicle and observed empty beer bottles in vehicle. Client ordered to exit vehicle and requested to perform Standardized Field Sobriety Tests. Thereafter, Client was arrested and charged with OVI. ZLM filed a Motion to Suppress, challenging, among other things, the constitutionality of the check-point and probable cause to arrest Client for OVI. During suppression hearing, dash-cam video was played in Court, contradicting testimony of arresting officer. Further, cross-examination of arresting officer established that officer failed to substantially comply with National Highway Traffic Safety Administration guidelines. Trial court agreed with ZLM that officer did not have probable cause to arrest Client and granted ZLM’s motion. The prosecuting attorney appealed the trial court’s decision to the Eighth District Court of Appeals. ZLM prevailed again on appeal, with the appellate court stating, in relevant part, “we cannot be compliant in the faulty prosecution of a case that results from improper, prejudicial gathering of evidence”. The OVI charge was subsequently DISMISSED.
12. Client charged with Operating a Vehicle Under the Influence and Operating a Vehicle With a Prohibited Breath-Alcohol Content (over .17). ZLM successfully obtained DISMISSAL of both charges following challenge of admissibility of Intoxilyzer 8000 breath-alcohol test results.
13. Client sought legal representation from ZLM defend an OVI charge and a probation violation, as Client was already on probation for a previous OVI conviction. Client was facing minimum of 20 days in jail on new OVI charge, and 27 days in jail for probation violation. ZLM filed a Motion to Vacate the prior conviction, asserting that the prior conviction was based on an improper plea. That Court agreed and entered an Order vacating the prior conviction, thus resulting in eliminating the probation violation. Subsequently, ZLM obtained a DISMISSAL of the prior OVI charge, based on double jeopardy grounds. As a result, ZLM successfully eliminated the Client’s prior OVI conviction and charge. Thereafter, ZLM successfully negotiated a reduction of the second OVI charge to Reckless Operation. As a result of ZLM’s representation, Client served no jail time at all, and was able to procure employment with a high six-figure salary.
14. ZLM successfully negotiated a reduction from OVI charge to a lesser charge of Physical Control for client with a Commercial Driver’s License (CDL), to avoid automatic 1-year CDL disqualification. ZLM attorneys further successfully obtained Court Order vacating Administrative License Suspension, to avoid 1-year CDL disqualification. Client sentenced to 6 months non-reporting probation, no Driver’s License Suspension. Previously imposed CDL disqualification resulting from Administrative License Suspension removed and deleted from Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles system, allowing Client to continue her employment as a CDL driver.
15. ZLM Client insured by a Fleet Policy of insurance due to his employment, charged with OVI, with breath-alcohol level in excess of .08, jeopardizing his insurability. ZLM successfully negotiated dismissal (and subsequent sealing) of the OVI charge, in exchange for a plea to a separately filed charge of Reckless Operation. Client remains insured.
16. ZLM convinced prosecutor to amend client’s OVI charge to a charge of Reckless Operation, despite the fact that Client admitted to consuming several beers, refused field sobriety tests, and submitted to a breath-test that produced a result of .130, after ZLM filed a Motion to Suppress, challenging, in part, the constitutionality of the arresting officer’s continued detention of ZLM Client, as traffic stop was based on officer not being able to read Client’s rear license plate and officer had conceded that once he exited his cruiser and began walking towards the client’s vehicle, he could observe license plate clearly.
17. ZLM convinced prosecutor to amend client’s OVI charge to a lesser offense despite Client’s blood test result reflecting that his blood alcohol content was a 0.431.  Prosecutor agreed to reduction based on issues raised by ZLM in a motion to suppress that argued the police officer violated the client’s constitutional rights by obtaining information about his medical condition and blood test result from a nurse at the hospital without obtaining a search warrant.
18. ZLM convinced prosecutor to amend client’s OVI charge to reckless operation despite Client’s breath-test reading of .170 and involvement in a single vehicle motor vehicle accident in which his vehicle was totaled based on issues raised in motion to suppress filed by ZLM challenging whether the officer had reasonable suspicion to request the client perform field sobriety tests when the officers who responded to the scene of the crash could be overheard talking on their body cameras about how the client was walking around fine and that his speech was good.  ZLM’s motion to suppress also challenged whether the officer administered field sobriety tests in substantial compliance with NHTSA standards.
19. ZLM convinced prosecutor to amend client’s OVI offense to a lesser offense despite her breath test reading of 0.151 due to issue discovered by ZLM in reviewing the instrument check records for the breath test machine. ZLM’s review of the breath test machine’s records reflected that during weekly instrument checks the machine tested outside of range multiple times over a six (6) month time period prior to and after the client’s breath test.
20. ZLM obtained a dismissal of Client’s OVI charge and minor misdemeanor speeding violation after winning a suppression hearing. Client was pulled over by a Trooper for an alleged speeding violation.  Upon detecting the alleged odor of an alcoholic beverage on the Client’s person, the Trooper requested the Client to exit his vehicle for field sobriety testing.  The Trooper alleged the Client failed all of the field sobriety tests and that the Client refused to submit to a breath test at a local police department.  The Court agreed with ZLM that there was no evidence that the Trooper administered the standardized field sobriety tests in substantial compliance with NHTSA standards.

1. ZLM Client’s wife (from an arranged marriage), accused Client of tying her to a chair, taping her mouth shut, and being verbally and physically abusive to her. Client was charged with felony kidnapping and abduction. ZLM persuasively convinced prosecuting attorney to dismiss charges. Client was not a United States citizen and would have been subject to removal from the United States if he was convicted of any of the charges that he was indicted for.
2. ZLM successfully defends Client charged with Domestic Violence by attacking credibility of complaining witness at trial. Client found NOT GUILTY following jury trial.
3. ZLM Client charged with Domestic Violence, in violation of R.C. 2919.25(A) and Disorderly Conduct, in violation of R.C. 2917.11(A)(1). Successfully convinced prosecuting attorney to DISMISS both charges.
4. Client charged with Domestic Violence of sister-in-law. ZLM convinced prosecutor to DISMISS charge.
5. ZLM Client charged with Domestic Violence for allegedly assaulting his daughter. ZLM conducted Bench Trial and client was found NOT GUILTY.
6. ZLM Client charged with Domestic Violence for allegedly assaulting and threatening his wife with whom Client was going through a divorce with. ZLM conducted a Bench Trial and the client was found NOT GUILTY.
7. ZLM Client charged with Felonious Assault, Felony Domestic Violence, and Felony Endangering Children out of an incident where Client threw a glass plate at his teenage son that broke and caused a large cut on the son’s arm that required medical attention. After a multi-day jury trial, the jury returned a verdict of NOT GUILTY on all counts. 

1. Only a few weeks away from trial, a young man who was charged with Aggravated Vehicular Assault, Vehicular Assault, and OVI, was uncomfortable with advice of another criminal defense attorney, who advised the young man to plead guilty to Aggravated Vehicular Assault, which carried with it a mandatory term of imprisonment of up to five years. The young man sought legal representation from ZLM. ZLM aggressively defended Client by filing and litigating a Motion to Suppress, by strategically advising Client to enter a plea of Guilty to the OVI charge that was pending in the local municipal court, and filing a Motion to Dismiss the vehicular assault charges on double jeopardy grounds. Ultimately, the Aggravated Vehicular Assault charge was dismissed and ZLM convinced the prosecuting attorney to amend the Vehicular Assault charge to a misdemeanor charge. Client avoided prison sentence and a felony conviction. Client was sentenced to a short term of PROBATION.
2. ZLM Client was involved in a two-vehicle collision, resulting in the death of the driver of the other vehicle. Client was facing eight years in prison, having been charged with Aggravated Vehicular Homicide, a Felony of the 2^nd Degree, and related OVI charges (including blood-alcohol in excess of .17). ZLM immediately engaged the services of a traffic crash reconstruction expert and traveled to the scene of the crash where ZLM attorney and expert located a crucial piece of physical evidence that had been ignored by the State of Ohio – a tire mark that marked the point of impact. Further, the traffic crash reconstructionist observed and documented tire marks establishing that the other vehicle had crossed the center-line and had significantly entered Client’s lane of travel. During a preliminary hearing, through cross-examination, ZLM was able to establish that investigating officers’ theory of the crash was contradicted by the physical evidence found at the scene. Further, during a Motion to Suppress hearing, ZLM established that the nurse that extracted Client’s blood had used hospital soap prior to drawing Client’s blood. As trial approached, ZLM attorneys discovered that the State of Ohio’s blood-testing expert had been the subject of internal disciplinary proceedings, thus compromising her credibility. During trial, through aggressive cross-examination and by introducing testimony from ZLM’s expert witnesses, including a blood-alcohol expert and the traffic crash reconstructionist, ZLM cast significant doubt on the State of Ohio’s case. Accordingly, after the presentation of evidence and prior to jury deliberations, the State of Ohio agreed, in relevant part, to amend and reduce the Felony 2 Aggravated Vehicle Homicide charge to a Felony 3 Aggravated Vehicular Homicide charge (Reckless). Client ultimately served less than one year in prison.

1. Juvenile Client charged with rape. ZLM attorneys issue numerous subpoenas for alleged victim’s school records, medical records, mental health provider records, establishing lack of credibility of alleged victim and retain services of DNA expert to attack State of Ohio DNA evidence and cast doubt on the relevance of a “sperm fraction” allegedly detected on the complaining witness’s underwear. ZLM attorneys convince prosecutor to DISMISS charge.
2. ZLM attorneys representing Juvenile Client charged with Aggravated Robbery, Kidnapping, Robbery, Receiving Stolen Property, Resisting Arrest, and Obstructing Official Business successfully obtain Court Order suppressing from evidence admissions made by Client while in custody. The State of Ohio appealed this Order, but the appeal was subsequently dismissed by the court of appeals. As a result, ALL CHARGES were subsequently DISMISSED.
3. Juvenile was charged with fifteen (15) counts of felony sexually oriented offenses. After ZLM reviewed voluminous discovery and determined that law enforcement violated the juvenile’s fourth amendment rights in conducting an unreasonable search during their investigation. Juvenile admitted to two (2) non-sexual offenses, and was sentenced to serve three (3) months of inactive probation.
4. ZLM convinced prosecutor to amend juvenile client’s felony gross-sexual imposition charge to a non-sexual assault offense based on arguments ZLM raised in a motion to dismiss the criminal complaints that challenged the constitutionality of the sex offense that the juvenile client was charged with and whether said offense, as charged, violated the juvenile client’s constitutional rights to equal protection of the laws and/or encouraged arbitrary, discriminatory enforcement, when both parties who engaged in the alleged sexual activity were minors.
5. Juvenile was charged with several felony drug offenses after a traffic stop. After ZLM reviewed the discovery, including several police reports and recorded radio traffic, our lawyers determined that law enforcement violated the juvenile’s fourth amendment rights in conducting an unreasonable search and seizure during the traffic stop. Charges dismissed entirely.
6. ZLM convinced prosecutor to dismiss juvenile client’s drug abuse and possession of drug paraphernalia charges based on issues raised in motion to suppress evidence that challenged whether the officer had reasonable, articulable suspicion to initiate an investigatory stop on her vehicle which was lawfully parked in a church parking lot.
7. ZLM convinced Judge to find that a juvenile client was not a delinquent child at the conclusion of a multiple day trial in which the client was accused of assaulting the father of a high school classmate who informed police that he had attempted to escort the client and the client’s friends off his property after they had arrived at party that they had not been invited to.

1. ZLM Client with long history of theft-related criminal convictions was charged with a felony theft offense for allegedly stealing an electronic device from a store. Despite the fact that the prosecutor played a surveillance video depicting the theft offense and a store employee identified the Client as the individual she observed looking at the device immediately prior to the theft, ZLM attorney was able to convince the jury that Client was NOT GUILTY.
2. ZLM Client was charged in a secret Indictment with two counts of theft by embezzlement from a business over a period of seven (7) years, felonies of the third degree. ZLM’s attorneys obtained all of the documentation from the company that allegedly showed the Client’s theft. However, after a review of the documentation, ZLM’s lawyers established that the Client was not stealing money, but instead, the company was issuing loans to the Client and said loans were well-documented on the company’s books. Furthermore, additional review determined that the company’s corporate officers were not only aware of the loans, but had authorized the loans, and that Client was actively re-paying the loans. As a result of ZLM’s investigation, the prosecuting attorney DISMISSED all charges against the Client on the condition that Client repay the loans from the company. Client readily complied and all charges were DISMISSED.
3. ZLM successfully persuaded judge to find Client Not Guilty of a Robbery offense at the conclusion of a bench trial based on argument raised that the amount of force used by the defendant and his juvenile co-defendant in allegedly snatching a cellphone and money out of the victim’s hand did not rise to the level of force necessary to enhance a misdemeanor theft offense into a felony robbery offense.
4. Mail carrier retained ZLM to represent her regarding theft of mail allegations involving over 700 pieces of mail and theft of gift cards. ZLM attorneys successfully negotiated a plea to federal Petty Offense misdemeanor charge of Obstruction of Mail. Client avoided prison and was sentenced to only two years probation.

1. Client, medical student at prestigious mid-western university, was falsely accused of non-consensual sexual activity by a fellow student. After a fundamentally unfair Panel Hearing before The University’s Title IX Hearing Board, the University found Client to be “Responsible” for violating the University’s Student Code of Conduct for “Sexual Penetration without Consent”. As a sanction for the alleged violation, the Client was permanently expelled from the University. Client retained ZLM’s services to appeal the University’s decision and sanction. ZLM’s attorneys thoroughly investigated the case, including the facts, the evidence the law, and the fundamentally unfair procedures employed by the University. Thereafter, ZLM assisted the Client in submitting a lengthy appeal letter to the University. ZLM argued that the Client’s constitutional rights were violated by the procedural manner in which the hearing was held because the Client was unable to cross-examine his accuser. Further, ZLM argued that the University’s findings and sanction was against the manifest weight of the evidence presented during the hearing. As a result of ZLM’s thorough analysis and persuasive briefing, the Client’s appeal of the University’s sanction was ultimately successful. The University reversed its previous decision to permanently expel the Client, and instead, imposed a far-lesser sanction of “Exclusion”, which permitted the Client to subsequently continue his education at the University.
2. ZLM advised client and appeared with client throughout the student conduct hearing process at Miami University concerning an allegation that the client and his roommate violated the Code of Student Conduct by possessing large quantities of drugs and firearms at his off-campus apartment and had been charged with multiple felony drug trafficking and drug possession offenses. ZLM representation included ZLM appearing with client at Summary Suspension Hearing with the Dean of Students and a subsequent Disciplinary Board Hearing.  Based on ZLM’s guidance and representation, client successfully convinced the Disciplinary Board to suspend, rather than expel him for said violations.
3. ZLM advised client and appeared with client throughout the student conduct hearing process at Miami University concerning an allegation that client pulled fire alarms at residence halls on campus when there was not a fire, in violation of the Code of Student Conduct. Client was also charged criminally with felony offenses relating to said allegations.  Said representation included ZLM appearing with client at Summary Suspension Hearing with the Dean of Students and convincing the Dean of Students to not impose a summary suspension on client. ZLM also appeared at a subsequent Disciplinary Board Hearing, and a assisted client in filing a written appeal of the Disciplinary Board’s decision to suspend him for 3 semesters.  Based on ZLM’s guidance and representation, client successfully convinced the Miami University Appellate Board to reduce the length of his suspension.

1. ZLM successfully defended Client charged with Engaging in Pattern of Corrupt Activity (RICO), as well numerous other felonies including Money Laundering, Tampering with Records, Gambling, Operating a Gambling House, Obstructing Justice, and Impersonation of Certain Officers. ZLM attorneys vigorously and aggressively defended the charges and ultimately convinced prosecuting attorneys to dismiss all of the charge except two (2) misdemeanors—Possession of Criminal Tools (R.C. 2923.24).  Client was placed on community control sanctions, which were terminated and Client’s convictions were later sealed.
2. ZLM Client charged with Engaging in Pattern of Corrupt Activity (RICO), as well numerous other felonies including Money Laundering and Tampering with Records and effectively facing a possible sentence of life in prison if convicted. All charges dismissed except one count of Telecommunications Fraud. R.C. 2913.05 (F-2), which client pled guilty to and was sentenced to only two years incarceration, but released on Judicial Release and placed upon probation after only eight months, with community control sanctions (probation) being terminated approximately ten months later.
3. ZLM Client was charged in a secret Indictment with two counts of theft by embezzlement from a business over a period of seven (7) years, felonies of the third degree. ZLM’s attorneys obtained all of the documentation from the company that allegedly showed the Client’s theft. However, after a review of the documentation, ZLM’s lawyers established that the Client was not stealing money, but instead, the company was issuing loans to the Client and said loans were well-documented on the company’s books. Furthermore, additional review determined that the company’s corporate officers were not only aware of the loans, but had authorized the loans, and that Client was actively re-paying the loans. As a result of ZLM’s investigation, the prosecuting attorney DISMISSED all charges against the Client on the condition that Client repay the loans from the company. Client readily complied and all charges were DISMISSED.

1. Client/Physician retained ZLM after being accused of violating federal drug trafficking/anti-diversion laws. Both the Ohio Medical Board and Ohio Pharmacy had also taken action against the client’s respective licenses.  Through ZLM’s representation, this case of first impression was resolved with said client/physician having no criminal charges filed against the client.  In addition, the Ohio Medical Board’s hearing officer recommended that the majority of the allegations be dismissed and that client should receive only a reprimand and no license suspension for the alleged misconduct.
2. Client/Law Student who applied to take the Ohio Bar Exam was rejected after her character and fitness interview. ZLM appealed the decision before a bar application appellate committee.  Following a hearing before the committee, in which ZLM presented witness testimony and additional evidence demonstrating applicant’s good character, truthfulness and fitness to practice law, the committee reversed the decision and recommended that the client be permitted to sit for the Ohio Bar Exam.  Client is now an upstanding member of the legal community.
3. Client/Attorney retained ZLM after being accused of professional misconduct with a presumptive sanction of disbarment. ZLM aggressively litigated and defended the client’s alleged misconduct and presented substantial and persuasive mitigatory evidence at a hearing before a panel of the Board of Professional Conduct.  The Supreme Court declined to disbar client.  Client received a sanction of license suspension which was partially stayed with conditions.
4. Client/Attorney hired ZLM after being accused of a pattern of professional misconduct over the span of several years. After ZLM’s aggressive defense, which included months of discovery, depositions and hearings, the Board of Professional Conduct dismissed all charges of misconduct.
5. Client/Licensed Physical Therapist accused of crimes of dishonesty faced potential permanent revocation of her license. Through ZLM’s representation, including persuasive presentation of mitigation evidence and zealous advocacy, the Ohio Physical Therapy Board only placed the client on probationary status.
6. Client/Attorney accused of various acts of professional misconduct including alleged acts taking place before a tribunal, retained ZLM. Trial was held before panel and all counts of alleged misconduct were dismissed.
7. Client/Attorney retained ZLM after being accused of a number of acts of professional misconduct. Trial was conducted before a panel and all counts of alleged misconduct were disproven and the grievance was dismissed.
8. Client/Attorney retained ZLM after being found in contempt of court and sentenced to jail. ZLM immediately obtained an order from the appellate court staying the imposition of the jail sentence, then successfully appealed the trial court’s finding of contempt.  ZLM WON the appeal, obtaining a reversal of the contempt finding from the Court of Appeals, resulting Client avoiding a jail sentence and clearing the contempt finding from the Client’s record.
9. Client/Social Worker retained ZLM who represented client before the Social Worker Board, which resulted in no discipline.
10. Client/Physician originally charged with a felony and accused of possession of drugs hired ZLM who was able to successfully convince the prosecutor to keep the case local in the municipal court and convinced the prosecutor and the court to permit him to enter into a first offender program which he successfully completed and the charges were dismissed. ZLM also represented the client before the Ohio Medical Board and negotiated a consent agreement whereby client’s license was only temporarily suspended for short period of time and the client’s medical license was soon thereafter was reinstated.
11. Client/Attorney retained ZLM regarding alleged fee-sharing violation by the client/attorney. ZLM successfully convinced Disciplinary Counsel during its investigation into the client’s account that the client did not share a fee with a non-lawyer and did not charge one of his clients a clearly excessive fee.
12. Client/Attorney was sued in two separate courts for defamation and slander and hired ZLM to defend against the civil suits. Through ZLM’s aggressive defense, the civil suits were dismissed and ZLM actually obtained monetary sanctions against the opposing party and opposing counsel.
13. Client/Judge retained ZLM and co-counsel for representation regarding alleged improper ads placed against an election opponent. ZLM filed a Motion to Dismiss which was granted by the three-member hearing panel.
14. Client/Attorney was summarily thrown in jail by a judge for alleged contempt of court and ZLM immediately went to the court room and convinced the Judge to release the attorney.
15. Client/Judge ZLM represented the interests of the Court and successfully defended a writ of prohibition seeking to prohibit the court from litigating a contempt proceeding against a non-party witness in a civil case that had been settled and dismissed. Supreme Court of Ohio ruled in Court/ZLM’s favor by holding that a court does retain jurisdiction even after a case is settled and dismissed to conduct contempt proceedings against that resulted from the case.
16. Client/Attorney retained ZLM to appeal a trial court’s finding of contempt against the attorney. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s finding of contempt and vacated said findings which the court of appeals found was issued without proper notice and hearing.
17. Client/Attorney was threatened by a court with a disciplinary action due to the court’s perception that the attorney had purposely failed to disclose a material fact to the court. ZLM represented the attorney and prevented any discipline against the attorney by showing that the attorney was not under any legal or ethical obligation to disclose the information.
18. Client/Attorney was notified by a court that it was conducting a contempt hearing against the attorney for allegedly improperly contacting a witness on a case. ZLM was hired and successfully prevented a contempt finding from being entered by the Court.
19. Client/Attorney retained ZLM to represent her with regard to a grievance alleging that the attorney failed to notify a client of a decision rendered from a court. ZLM successfully convinced Disciplinary Counsel to dismiss the grievance.

1. ZLM filed a 42 USC 1983 wrongful death and excessive force lawsuit against local municipality. ZLM successfully opposed a motion for summary judgment filed by the municipality. The municipality appealed to the federal appellate court and, again, ZLM succeeded. Following remand to the trial court, ZLM negotiated a confidential settlement in excess of $590,000.00.
2. ZLM negotiated a $540,000.00 settlement with the City of Cleveland following a 42 U.S.C. §1983 lawsuit for excessive force against City of Cleveland and Cleveland police officer who shot ZLM Client.
3. ZLM negotiated a $500,000.00 settlement with the City of Cleveland involving a case in which ZLM sued a City of Cleveland Police Officer and the City of Cleveland for use of excessive force in the shooting death of a twenty-one (21) year-old man who the police were searching for in connecting with a recent bank robbery. ZLM successfully appealed the district court’s ruling which had granted the Officer qualified immunity to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals and obtained a reversal of the district court’s ruling.
4. ZLM negotiated a $100,000.00 settlement with the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction involving a case in which ZLM sued the ODRC and several corrections officers who failing to protect client from being assaulted by another inmate as the corrections officers failed follow an order to single cell client and the client was subsequently strangled to death by his cellmate.
5. ZLM negotiated a $75,000.00 settlement with the City of Solon after client’s felony criminal charges of kidnapping and gross-sexual imposition were dismissed by the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office.  ZLM’s civil complaint alleged that the City of Solon and several of its police officers lacked probable cause to arrest client for gross-sexual imposition and challenged whether the officers had been properly trained in how to investigate allegations of sexual assault.
6. ZLM negotiated a confidential settlement involving a case in which ZLM sued police officers for the use of excessive force, including the use of a Tazer, during client’s arrest.
7. ZLM negotiated a $22,500.00 settlement with the City of Canton involving a case in which ZLM sued several officers of the City of Canton Police Department and the City of Canton for use of excessive force during clients arrest for a drug possession offense in which the officers used an arm takedown maneuver that caused client to suffer a broken wrist and injuries to her face.